The rise of early Nile basin civilizations can be traced back to one of the most significant climatic changes of the last 11,000 years, a period of protracted hyperaridity that led not only to North Africa’s deserts we know today, but also to a multi-generational exodus depicted in much Saharan rupestrian art.
In 2013, private money transfers made by international migrants ($404 billion to developing countries) exceeded the official development assistance (ODA) by more than three times. Remittances therefore appear as a constant subject in the present debate on the post-2015 financing framework. A realistic assessment of how remittances (can) financially contribute to the achievement of sustainable development goals is now required. To do so, the post-2015 financing debate should integrate five key principles.
The potential for mobilizing diaspora savings for financing education, healthcare and infrastructure in countries of origin is massive. Some 170 million international migrants from developing countries send over $400 billion in remittances to their countries of origin. At the same time, migrants also save a part of their incomes in the country of origin, mostly as bank deposits. Migrant savings can be mobilized, through diaspora bonds or non-resident deposits, for financing development efforts in countries of origin.
We make some back-of-the-envelope calculations of diaspora savings using data on migrant stocks, skill composition, and assumptions about migrant earnings. We assume that the high-skilled migrants earn the same as the native workers in destination countries, but that the low-skilled migrants earn less – one-third in the OECD countries, one-fifth in the GCC countries, and one-half in other destination countries.
Foreign students who attend U.S. colleges and universities on F-1 visas bring billions of dollars each year to local economies. In order for their economic benefit to be realized through increased local jobs and investment, however, regional leaders need to capitalize on their connections to fast-growing foreign markets. This is the key finding of a new Brookings report I released today.
Over the past decades, following the creation of the Schengen area, the European Union has redefined its border control policies towards third countries with the stated objective of improving security through more efficient external border controls, while facilitating access of those having a legitimate interest to enter the EU territory.
These policies have direct implications for third countries on their economic and human development. A key channel is through capacity-building undertaken under the auspices of European migration management framework.
“Is it true there are lots of us [in the US] and I don’t have to hide?” - Fred, Uganda (living in Kenya Kakuma Refugee Camp)
After its summer recess, the Kyrgyz parliament is set to examine a repressive law against sexual minorities, often described as a copycat of the Russian “gay propaganda” law. This would be the fourth country this year to approve new legislation limiting the rights of sexual minorities.
Politicians tend to get all the blame for immigration policies not working. But politicians are often doomed to fail on migration questions because there are deep-rooted problems with the way we all debate immigration and with what we expect of immigration policy.
Salauddin, a farmer, migrated to Dhaka (the capital) from a rural area of Bangladesh because of severe drought. He is now one of half million rickshaw-pullers. He spends only tk 100 a day and saves the rest; when having saved tk3000 (usually in a three-week time), he goes home to see his wife and children. His wife says, “thanks to this money, I can now cook this meal.”
The World Bank’s KNOMAD (Global Knowledge Partnership on Migration and Development) held a conference on internal migration and urbanization in Dhaka on April 30 – May 1, 2014, in collaboration with the Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit, University of Dhaka. The conference aimed to better understand the multifaceted aspects of internal migration and found the following.
Last week the New York Times featured an editorial suggesting that the World Bank should become a remittance center. Remittances are the "largest and arguably most effective antipoverty effort in the world.....financed by the poor themselves...,” it stated. “But the cost to transfer those billions is likely to rise soon...[as] big banks are leaving the money-transfer business, including Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase."
"If banks can’t profitably transmit remittances — and won’t do so as a low-margin courtesy — then other secure, low-cost options must be found. One solution would be for the World Bank to become a remittance center.”
For the US authorities I will still be “a legal alien”, but according to the UN definition I am going to be a migrant from tomorrow on. More precisely: I will be a long-term international migrant since I have been residing for more than twelve months in a country other than the country of usual residence. Today, I am still a short-term international migrant (three to twelve months in another country than the one of usual residence).
I am wondering whether the statistic offices immediately realize that there is another migrant living on this planet. I may be the 46,199,912th migrant living in the US or one of estimated 234 million migrants living worldwide (or 3.2 per cent of the world population). And I will also be part of the majority of international migrants (59 per cent) who lives in a developed country.